A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-March/072292.html below:

[Python-Dev] Breaking calls to object.__init__/__new__

[Python-Dev] Breaking calls to object.__init__/__new__ [Python-Dev] Breaking calls to object.__init__/__new__Adam Olsen rhamph at gmail.com
Thu Mar 22 23:29:29 CET 2007
On 3/22/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> Can we move this to c.l.py or python-ideas? I don't think it has any
> bearing on the decision on whether object.__init__() or
> object.__new__() should reject excess arguments. Or if it does I've
> lost the connection through the various long articles.

It's about use-cases involving what object.__init__() does.  However,
as it supports the decision that has been already made, you are right
in that it no longer belongs on python-dev.  I'll move further replies
somewhere else.


> I also would like to ask Mr. Olsen to tone down his rhetoric a bit.
> There's nothing unpythonic about designing an API using positional
> arguments.

Again, I apologize for that.  But the unpythonic comment referred only
to providing an assortment of unobvious choices, rather than a single
obvious one (perhaps with specialty options rarely used).  It was not
in reference to my previous argument against positional arguments.

-- 
Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4